; Prabhakar Ragde; users@racket-lang.org
Subject: Re: [racket] Macros and literal-id
Are you sure that's what he meant? When I am writing syntax-rules, I often
recurse when attempting to recur.
RAC
On Aug 9, 2011, at 11:30 AM, Jos Koot wrote:
> I enjoyed glancing through your links. In the f
Jos Koot wrote at 08/09/2011 01:30 PM:
In the first one I saw the word
'recurse'. I think you ment 'recur', not 'curse again' :)
That, I submit, is evidence in support of my original assertion.
Wrangling "syntax-rules" consumed all my meager IQ points, leaving none
for other concerns, lik
7;recur', not 'curse again' :)
> Jos
>
> -Original Message-
> From: users-boun...@racket-lang.org [mailto:users-boun...@racket-lang.org]
> On Behalf Of Neil Van Dyke
> Sent: martes, 09 de agosto de 2011 19:02
> To: Prabhakar Ragde
> Cc: users@racket-lang
: martes, 09 de agosto de 2011 19:02
To: Prabhakar Ragde
Cc: users@racket-lang.org
Subject: Re: [racket] Macros and literal-id
Prabhakar Ragde wrote at 08/09/2011 12:05 PM:
> Neil Van Dyke wrote:
>
>> The hardest macro tasks, in "syntax-rules",
>> become opportunities t
Prabhakar Ragde wrote at 08/09/2011 12:05 PM:
Neil Van Dyke wrote:
The hardest macro tasks, in "syntax-rules",
become opportunities to show off how well one can do scary-looking CPS
that's really expensive at expansion time.
For my edification, as well as that of other macro newbies, can you
The word 50 version is that syntax-rules only allows a limited form of
pattern rewriting, but syntax-case lets you write arbitrary functions
that rewrite the syntax. A big reason for this being important is that
you can write better error messages, but there are other things too,
of course.
On Tue
Neil Van Dyke wrote:
The hardest macro tasks, in "syntax-rules",
become opportunities to show off how well one can do scary-looking CPS
that's really expensive at expansion time.
For my edification, as well as that of other macro newbies, can you give
some examples of this, and how syntax-cas
Richard Cleis wrote at 08/09/2011 10:25 AM:
What is the reason for using syntax-rules instead of syntax-parse? (To maintain
RnRs compatibility?)
I use it for historical reasons, from when I learned it in RnRS. For
people new to Racket, I will probably be nudging them towards something
ot
At Tue, 09 Aug 2011 08:25:14 -0600,
Richard Cleis wrote:
> What is the reason for using syntax-rules instead of syntax-parse?
> (To maintain RnRs compatibility?)
When simple pattern-matching and templating can express what you want,
syntax-rules (and even define-syntax-rule) is great and very easy
What is the reason for using syntax-rules instead of syntax-parse? (To maintain
RnRs compatibility?)
RAC
On Aug 9, 2011, at 8:15 AM, Neil Van Dyke wrote:
> BTW, for future readers... in this example:
>
> (define-syntax if*
> (syntax-rules (then else)
> ((_ ?test (then ?consequent) (else ?al
BTW, for future readers... in this example:
(define-syntax if*
(syntax-rules (then else)
((_ ?test (then ?consequent) (else ?alternate))
(if ?test ?consequent ?alternate
The "?" part of the pattern variables is just a naming convention of
individual programmers. The "?" is the firs
Notice that the program below works in our primary language, #lang racket, just
as well. -- Matthias
On Aug 9, 2011, at 2:40 AM, Marco Maggi wrote:
> #!r6rs
> (import (except (rnrs) else))
>
> (define-syntax if*
> (syntax-rules (then else)
>((_ ?test (then ?consequent) (else ?alternate)
Marco Maggi wrote:
> verify that the components of the input macro falling in the
^^^
Sorry, it should be "input form" there.
--
Marco Maggi
_
For list-related administrative tasks
Harry Spier wrote:
> And if not, would it be possible for someone to give a
> simple example of its use.
I will use R6 Scheme here. Scheme defines the IF syntax as:
(if ?test ?consequent ?alternate)
where the only "language keyword" is IF itself. Many other
languages use a version wi
On 2011-08-09 01:15:01 -0400, Harry Spier wrote:
>Are there any actual examples in the on-line documentation (guide or
>reference) showing the use of "literal-id" in a syntax-rules statement.
>I.e. in:
>(define-syntax id
> (syntax-rules (literal-id ...)
>[pattern templa
Dear list members,
Are there any actual examples in the on-line documentation (guide or reference)
showing the use of "literal-id" in a syntax-rules statement.
I.e. in:
(define-syntax id
(syntax-rules (literal-id ...)
[pattern template]
...))
And if not, would it be possible for some
16 matches
Mail list logo
